Keynes Vs Hayek: The Sequel

Just over a year ago, Econstories managed to successfully, if briefly, fuse the worlds of rap and monetary policy in the form of "Fear the boom and bust" - a Keynes vs Hayek rap anthem. And now, when with every passing day the shamanism of Keynesian voodoo is exposed for all too see, courtesy of the tide of endless credit and free money finally flowing out, we get the sequel. Enjoy.

I like this as much as the next guy but isnt this just more hegelian dialectical stuff? Since neither camps address usury, neither camps address the root causes. In other words, neither camp dethrones the current aristocracy.

"current aristocracy", It's not, its a global dictatorship, we are give the illusion of choice, while limited choices are provided. Who to blame, who to hate, who to trust, at the end of the day your only truly free to decide whether your a walking zombie slave or dead.

"The man who is possessed of wealth, who lolls on his sofa or rolls in his carriage, cannot judge the wants or feelings of the day-laborer. The government we mean to erect is intended to last for ages. The landed interest, at present, is prevalent; but in process of time, when we approximate to the states and kingdoms of Europe, — when the number of landholders shall be comparatively small, through the various means of trade and manufactures, will not the landed interest be overbalanced in future elections, and unless wisely provided against, what will become of your government? In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation.Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability.

I'm simply saying that there is an enormous hegemonic influence stemming from the Jewish tribe that is entirely seperate from what any reasonable person would identify as "western". Any research conducted into the matter that fails to discover or mention such influence is disingenuous. What I am saying is that Chomsky's professionalism is subordinate to his race loyalty - further, although he is a critic of Israeli policy, he is an ardent Zionist.

Which is interesting when you consider it in context. On the one hand he suggests that the Western world throw their borders open and admit hordes of hostile invaders while at the same time he supports a racially cohesive and nationalistic Jewish homeland.

FYI the concept of interest predates written history and thus is no product of "the userers" and more of a natural law of economics.How could future money, due to the uncertaintyinherent in its title, possibly be of the same worth of money in your hand? This is analogous to that age old tidbit of wisdom "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush".

This is a chicken egg scenario and you have the cause effect reversed. Money is worth more today than tomorrow because of the inherent inflationary effects of interest. No interest, no inflation, the value of money will stabilize through time - that is the closest you are gonna get to utopia. No tyrannts, no malinvestment, just pure free trade minus usury.

There is a Quantum Mechanical event which, when delayed, the particle must return energy with interest. Possibly matters' dominance over anti-matter. Does this mean (like an expanding Central Bank balance sheet) that the Cosmos has a disposition toward "interest", that equilibrium comes through expansion of lopsidedness???

Macon B. Allen, the first African-American acknowledged to have gained admission to a state bar when he passed the examination for the Maine bar in 1844.1Allen learned the law as almost all aspiring lawyers did in this period: he read it in the office of a beneficent private attorney while working as this attorney's clerk. A year later, Allen would later gain admission to the Massachusetts bar.2 Three years after Allen entered the Maine bar, the Governor of Massachusetts appointed him a justice of the peace, making Allen the first African-American to serve in any judicial capacity.3Robert Morrisbecame the second African-American lawyer in the country4, and, in 1852, he became the second African-American judge when the Governor of Massachusetts appointed him to a county magistrate position, a more formal judicial position than justice of the peace.

When involuntary unemployment exists, the marginal disutility of labour is necessarily less than the utility of the marginal product. Indeed it may be much less. For a man who has been long unemployed some measure of labour, instead of involving disutility, may have a positive utility. If this is accepted, the above reasoning shows how “wasteful” loan expenditure[8] may nevertheless enrich the community on balance. Pyramid-building, earthquakes, even wars may serve to increase wealth, if the education of our statesmen on the principles of the classical economics stands in the way of anything better.

Yes, and we have the pyramids still, as the byproduct of ancient workers off-season employment by central planning. It was never about eternal life for the pharoah and his squeeze, it was an FDR-like centrally planned jobs program! Sure you may say that the Net Present Value of the project was negative at the time, or that the long run caught up with those workers a lot faster because of their labor on behalf of the man, but I say to that Neee!

Keynes' private financial actions were often the opposite of his public advice. In short, the man was a master at manipulating key figures in the ruling elites. He traveled the world, partied hearty, dispensed economic wisdom/advice, and had a gay ol’ time doing it.

The serious side of Keynes is the towering genius, and his tome on economics stands the test of time. Great stuff for gaining a foundation, just know that he is laughing from the grave at fools that even today repeat the mistakes of the past.

I don't know that most people would appreciate this unless they had studied some econ. But I think the history of econ and the almost religious-like fervor various theories have seemed to inspire over time is more interesting than the subject itself.

I'm continually having to describe myself as a "fan, not an acolyte" of the Austrian school of thought. Do I agree with the basic premises? Big time. Do I think it is the "be all and end all" of economic thought? No.

That's a major tenet of The Austrian School...savings are the driver, not debt. If you have no savings, you have no targeted investment; capital flows are skewed, mis-allocated. Money sloshes around and bad ideas/ventures use up as much capital as good ones.

The Euros structure corresponds to many of Hayek's beliefs about money - he was anti sovergin money and therefore against republicanism.

The creation of the EEC and the Euro are not entirely the same thing although closely related - the disposal of De Gaulle changed the power dynamic withen Europe permanently

The Euro is the great sovergin killer both withen Europe and of course the US.

Many unsophisticated bankers in Ireland , US and elsewhere cannot get their heads around the Euro as they traditionally fractionally multiplied a sovergin money base - there is not enough sovergin money in the euro zone to pay all the debts incurred by private credit hence the rise in Gold as that is the only other mechanism on the Euro balance sheet to clear the debts.

"Opposition to new system from established bankers...........

This necessity of all banks to develop wholly new practices will undoubtedly be the cause of strong opposition to the abolition of the government monopoly. It is unlikely that most of the older bankers, brought up in the prevailing routine of banking, will be capable of coping with those problems. I am certain that many of the present leaders of the profession will not be able to conceive how it could possibly work and therefore will describe the whole system as impracticable and impossible.

Especially in countries where competition among banks has for generations been restricted by cartel arrangements, usually tolerated and even encouraged by governments, the older generation of bankers would probably be completely unable even to imagine how the new system would operate and therefore be practically unanimous in rejecting it. But this foreseeable opposition of the established practitioners ought not to deter us. I am also convinced that if a new generation of young bankers were given the opportunity they would rapidly develop techniques to make the new forms of banking not only safe and profitable but also much more beneficial to the whole community than the existing one."

Nice try, we're still appropriating your pension to pay for our beloved bankers' bonuses and taking away your right to collective bargaining so we can further concentrate power into fewer and fewer hands.

There actually is shamanism in Keynesianism, specially with the monetarist keynesianism. Still, Hayek is no holy grail either. Just another very fundamentalist, very much (although he would never have admitted it) a numerologist stuck with the numbers and very little of what's real behind them. I can still remember Hayek's words about Limits to Growth. Anybody who believes in perpetual growth is no better than the monetarist keynesians of today.

Hayek doesn't have the answer to everything, but he's a hell of a lot better than the Krugmans, the Friedmans, and the other charlatan wankers out there saying, "no inflation no inflation". It's just like how Thomas Jefferson was a philandering slaveholder, but an intellectual and political giant of his age.

Last century’s famous economist Henry Hazlitt showed again and again that Keynes pronounced his theories ex cathedra, without substantial statistics to back them up. Then, if actual statistics were produced that seemed to show results opposite to what his theories had predicted, he simply challenged the statistics.

Chairman Bernanke, it develops, is Keynes reincarnated. His analysis of the economy and its future is statistical cherry picking in the finest tradition of Fabian Socialism.

First, like Keynes, Bernanke brings uphis “among other factors” menu. As jplotinussaid yesterday, “Those words were used to describe higher gas and food prices.” Then he selects the appropriate factors promising “easing” where needed and eliminates factors outside his concerns,such as gas prices.

Dr. No effectively analyses the Bernanke propaganda: “The Bernak answers gas prices are a function of supply and demand and the FED has little control. Several questions later, he states QE2 is working since they saw an increase in stock prices. Interesting how supply and demand are selective in what price they choose to control.”

One could almost hear Keynes applauding yesterday in the great beyond ”Word Cloud.”But let’s be fair to our famous Fabian; Bernanke will never achieve his ethereal heights in economic make believe.

Even the progressives are unhappy with Ben’s projection of 7% unemployment in 2014. A 7% unemployment, they say, is hardly comforting in light of the fact that Ben, the banker’s banker, is going to take care first - come what may - of the financial sector.

So lets see if an idiot like me got the just of the video. At least the historical path we traverse:

Push as many of the middle class as we can back under the poverty level. Keep subsidizing entitlement because the government can't create jobs. When this is unsustainable, start a world war and we get full employment, and at the same time a decrease in population. Prosperity to the military machine and its cogs, banks and Wall Street, which makes the country prosper, while the populous suffers shortages and rations in the name of patriotism.

Great vid. Better than genuine MTV crap. And of course, Keynes's arguments are all immoral. But since neither addresses the role of the State in allowing market distortions one way or the other, its ultimately a pissing contest.